Impact Assessment in Nunavut Cambridge Bay, Nunavut Governor General - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Governor General Canadian Leadership Conference, Cambridge Bay, NU – June 5, 2017

Impact Assessment in Nunavut

Cambridge Bay, Nunavut

Objectives

• 1. Share the Nunavut Impact Review Board’s

experience and perspectives on impact assessment in Nunavut

• 2. Provide background on Nunavut’s regulatory

system, including the legislative basis

• 3. Highlight regional challenges and opportunities
• 4. Discuss importance of coordination and

fostering effective working relationships

• 5. Discuss approach to addressing challenges

within the Nunavut context

2

• Nunavut became its
• wn territory in 1999
• Area > 2,000,000 km2

– 1/5 of Canada

• Population ≈ 36,700
• 25 communities

– Air access only

• 4 official languages:

– Inuktitut, Inuinnaqtun – English, French

• Crown lands and Inuit

Owned lands

• GDP ≈ $2.5 B (2014)

3

Nunavut

Fast Facts

4

Modern Treaties in Canadas’ North

Name of Agreement Year James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement 1975 Inuvialuit Final Agreement 1984 Gwich’in Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement 1992 Nunavut Land Claims Agreement 1993 Yukon First Nations (Umbrella) Agreement 1993 Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claims Agreement 1993 Tlicho Land Claims and Self Government Agreement 2003 Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement 2005 Nunavik Inuit Land Claims Agreement 2008 Eeyou Marine Region Land Claims Agreement 2010

5

NUNAVUT’S REGULATORY SYSTEM

Nunavut Land Claims Agreement and the Nunavut Act received Royal Assent

• n July 9, 1993, creating Canada’s newest

Territory

• The Nunavut Agreement provided Inuit with:

– Title to approximately 350,000 km2 (140,000 sq mi) of land, of which, 35,257 km2 (13,613 sq mi) include mineral rights; – The right to harvest wildlife on lands and waters throughout the Nunavut settlement area – A share of federal government royalties from oil, gas and mineral development on Crown lands – The right to negotiate with industry for economic and social benefits from the development of non‐renewable resources on Inuit Owned Lands – The creation of three federally funded national parks – Capital transfer payments of $1.9 billion over 15 years and a $13 million Training Trust Fund for the establishment of the Government of Nunavut

Nunavut Agreement

7

Land & Resources Dispute Resolution Wildlife

Management

Land Use Planning

Impact Assessment

Water Use Licencing

Development proposals must satisfy the requirements of:

– Land use planning – Environmental Impact Assessment – Water and Land Use Licensing

Nunavut Regulatory System

9

What is the NIRB?

10 10

Chairperson Elizabeth Copland (NIRB‐GOC) Board Member Vacant (NTI‐GOC) Board Member Guy Alikut (NTI‐GOC) Board Member Henry Ohokannoak (NTI‐GOC) Board Member Allen Maghagak (NTI‐GOC) Board Member Phillip Omingmaktok (GN) Board Member Marjorie Kaluraq (GN) Board Member Vacant (GOC) Board Member Vacant (GOC)

Up to 9 Members comprise the NIRB, including the Chairperson

11 11

Who is the NIRB?

Executive Director Ryan Barry Director, Finance & Administration Mark Ings Senior Finance Officer Priscilla Evalik Human Resources Manager Vacant Secretary/ Receptionist Lena Atatahak Summer Students Vacant Director, Technical Services Tara Arko Manager, Technical Administration Jaida Ohokannoak GIS Specialist Jorgen Komak Environmental Administrator (2) Natasha Lear Donna Tikhak Junior Technical Advisor (2) Mia Otokiak Talia Maksagak Technical Advisor I,II (5) Solomon Amuno Davin St. Pierre Kofi Boa‐Antwi Keither Morrison Shanley Thompson Manager, Impact Assessment Sophia Granchinho Manager, Project Monitoring Kelli Gillard Manager, Communications Jeannie Evalik Interpreter/ Translator I,II (2) Josie Tucktoo‐Lacasse Sandra Naqiktarvik Outreach Coordinator Stephanie Taptuna Environmental Technologist William Nicoll Policy Advisor Heather Rasmussen

24 STAFF TOTAL June 1, 2017

Nunavut Impact Review Board

Staff Organizational Chart

Who is the NIRB?

12 12

• Nunavut Land Claims Agreement (Articles 10‐13)
• Nunavut Waters and Nunavut Surface Rights Tribunal Act
• Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act

Nunavut’s Regulatory System

13 13

NuPPAA

• Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment

Act

– (NuPPAA)

• Project proposals submitted directly to

NPC (“one‐window approach”)

• Public registry requirements
• Language, privacy, access to information

requirements

• Timeline for NPC conformity review
• Timelines for Ministerial Decisions
• Enforcement provisions

14 14

Coordination

• Coordination between Nunavut IPGs and adjacent

jurisdictions is made possible through the Nunavut Agreement and associated legislation

• Nunavut IPGs maintain regular contact and make

efforts to meet as a group annually

• NIRB, NPC, NWB and NWMB may also coordinate as

a Nunavut Marine Council to provide advice and recommendations to government about issues affecting Nunavut’s marine areas

ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᒌᓐᓂᖅ ‐ Ikajuqtigiinniq

“Working together for a common cause”

15 15

NUNAVUT IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The Nunavut Impact Review Board’s Mission is to Protect and Promote the wellbeing of the Environment and Nunavummiut through the Impact Assessment Process

• At all times the primary objectives of the NIRB are to

protect and promote the existing and future well‐being of the residents and communities of the Nunavut Settlement Area, and to protect the ecosystemic integrity of the Nunavut Settlement Area.

• The NIRB must take into account the well‐being of

residents of Canada outside the Nunavut Settlement Area.

• The NIRB reviews ecosystemic (i.e. biophysical)

impacts and socio‐economic impacts of proposed development projects

• The mandate of the NIRB does not include the

establishment of requirements for socio‐economic benefits

• The NIRB makes recommendations to Government;

Government accepts, rejects or varies the NIRB’s recommendations based on the criteria under the Nunavut Agreement.

NIRB Mandate

17 17

• Screen project proposals to determine

whether or not a review is required

• Gauge and define the extent of regional

impacts

• Review ecosystemic and socio‐economic

impacts of project proposals

• Determine whether project proposals

should proceed, and if so, under what terms and conditions

• Monitor projects that have been

approved to proceed

NIRB compliance monitoring and effects monitoring allow for feedback into ongoing impact assessments

Nunavut Impact Assessment

18 18

• Impact Assessment Processes in Nunavut include:

– Issues scoping – Development of an Environmental Impact Statement – Public commenting opportunities – Language requirements – translation/interpretation – Community meetings – Newsletters, notices, public engagement programs – Online public registries – Technical workshops – Community roundtables – Public Hearings

ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᒌᓐᓂᖅ ‐ Ikajuqtigiinniq

“Working together for a common cause”

Nunavut Impact Assessment

19 19

What types of project proposals does the NIRB assess?

• Roads / trails
• Marine infrastructure
• Research
• Mineral exploration
• Mining
• Telecommunications
• Oil & gas
• Nuclear power
• Tourism
• Hydro‐electric

Nunavut Impact Assessment

20 20

NIRB receives project proposal Check for completeness Distribute for public comment Conduct technical impact assessment Board Members Vote Approved with terms and conditions Full Review Required Proposal should be modified or abandoned Issue Screening Decision Report NIRB receives project proposal Check for completeness Distribute for public comment Conduct technical impact assessment Board Members Vote

The Screening Process

NIRB hosts Community Scoping Visits NIRB issues Final Scope of Project EIS Guidelines developed NIRB issues EIS Guidelines Draft EIS accepted: Technical Review begins NIRB hosts Community Info Sessions Technical Meeting Pre‐Hearing Conference & Community Roundtable NIRB issues PHC Report Final EIS accepted: Technical Review begins Public Hearing & Community Roundtable NIRB issues Final Report to Responsible Minister(s) Minister’s Decision: NIRB Report Accepted NIRB issues Project Certificate Minister refers project for Review NIRB receives Draft EIS submission NIRB receives Final EIS submission NIRB Screening Decision: Review required

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

The Review Process

Monitoring Programs

• Royalties from mining developments go to the landowner,

either the Government of Canada or Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.

– Royalties to Government are also shared with NTI

• Taxes go to Government of Canada and Government of

Nunavut

• No major development in Nunavut may commence until an

Inuit Impact and Benefits Agreement (IIBA) is finalized

• IIBAs are largely confidential documents negotiated by the

project proponent and the designated Inuit organization

– Some details of IIBA contents necessarily inform the NIRB’s impact assessment process – IIBAs address compensation, training, labour, business contracts – IIBAs must be consistent with terms of project approval

Addressing Benefits

24 24

Infrastructure Deficit

• Major development projects in Nunavut may be

hindered by a lack of basic infrastructure, such as ports, roads, airports, railways, power plants, etc.

– High cost for developing project‐specific infrastructure

• Short construction/operation season

– May be further restricted by wildlife migrations, sensitive periods – Winter roads, seasonal resupply, ice‐breaking shipping

25 25

Environmental Conditions

• Available baseline information is often very limited

– Climate change is further affecting known conditions

• Changing wildlife populations

– Natural variability, encroaching development, changing climate

• Changing community populations and demographics
• Contemporary land use and wage economy
• Increasing interest in the North from Canada and the

World

– Legislated protection for specific wildlife species – Increased participation by NGOs

26 26

Public Engagement

• Searchable online registries provide project information,

guidance materials and digital comment forms to the public

Public Engagement

• In‐person meetings are scheduled in potentially‐

affected communities at various stages in the assessment of a proposed project

• Information is shared and community members provide

their questions and comments directly

• Public engagement is an iterative process

Public Engagement

Local Knowledge

• The term Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit

encompasses Inuit “Traditional Knowledge” (TK)

– Encompasses local and community based knowledge, ecological knowledge (both traditional and contemporary), which is rooted in the daily life of Inuit people, and has an important contribution to make to an environmental assessment

• Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit assists greatly in

making impact predictions, particularly where scientific baseline may be lacking

Public Engagement

Kitikmeot Region

– Izok Corridor, Base Metals – Jericho, Diamond – Hackett River, Base Metals – Back River, Gold – Doris North, Gold – Phase 2 Hope Bay, Gold

Kivalliq Region

– Meadowbank, Gold – Kiggavik, Uranium – Meliadine, Gold

Baffin Region

– Mary River, Iron Ore – Iqaluit Hydroelectric

32 32

TRANSBOUNDARY RELATIONSHIPS

The Nunavut Impact Review Board seeks to coordinate and cooperate with agencies and organizations in adjacent jurisdictions through the Impact Assessment Process

Legislative Basis

• NLCA Section 12.11.1: NIRB may upon request by Government or,

with the consent of Government, upon request by a DIO, review a project proposal located outside of the Nunavut Settlement Area which may have significant adverse ecosystemic or socio‐economic effects on the Nunavut Settlement Area.

• NLCA Section 12.11.2: Without limiting the jurisdiction of NIRB or

EARP as set out in this Article, the Government of Canada and the Territorial Government, assisted by NIRB, shall use their best efforts to negotiate agreements with other jurisdictions to provide for collaboration in the review of project proposals which may have significant transboundary ecosystemic or socio‐economic impacts.

• NuPPAA Section 156: (1) If a project is to be carried out partly
• utside the designated area, sections 76and 80 apply in respect of

the entire project. (2) Sections 77 to 79, 81, 82 and, subject to subsection (1), 85 apply only in respect of the portion of the project to be carried out inside the designated area

34 34

35

Government Aboriginal Groups Environmental Agencies

Government of Manitoba Athabasca Denesuline Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Government of Northwest Territories Déline Land Corporation Eeyou Marine Region (Impact Review Board) Government of Saskatchewan Dene Nation Joint Secretariat – Inuvialuit Renewable Resource Committees (EIRB, EISC) Municipal Governments (e.g. Hamlet of Holman) The Grand Council of the Crees Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board Nunatsiavut Government Lutsel’ K Dene First Nation Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board Tļįcho Government North Slave Metis Alliance National Energy Board NWT Dechi Laott’l First Nation Nunavik Marine Region (Impact Review Board Yellowknife Dene Sahtu Renewable Resources Board Makivik Corporation

Transboundary Groups

36 36

• Fundamental goals of transboundary

coordination include:

– Respect treaty rights and land claim agreements – Keep all parties informed and promote

• pportunities for engagement

– Receive and provide support – Exchange information and share best practices – Communicate regularly – Appreciate the wide range of technical, regional, and traditional expertise

Transboundary Coordination

37 37

• NIRB currently has agreements with:

– Nunavut Water Board – Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board – National Energy Board – Nunavik Marine Region Impact Review Board & Eeyou Marine Region Impact Review Board

Coordination

38 38

Transboundary Impacts

ADDRESSING CHALLENGES

“Out of clutter, find simplicity. From discord, find harmony. In the middle of difficulty, lies opportunity” Albert Einstein

Addressing Challenges

• The NIRB’s mission is to protect and promote the

well‐being of the Environment and Nunavummiut through the Impact Assessment Process

• The NIRB’s vision is to be a leader in the field of

Impact Assessment that incorporates both Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and accepted scientific knowledge

• The NIRB is a small organization in a remote

setting with a very broad mandate and big responsibilities

– Presents challenges and opportunities for success

40 40

The NIRB strives to maintain an open, structured and informative process

– Development of resource materials, public guides,

• nline registry

– Strong focus on promoting public engagement – Time and energy devoted to developing proficiency in relevant issues: arctic shipping, uranium mining, hydroelectric development, etc. – Transparent auditing, open relationship with media

Addressing Challenges

The NIRB also strives to be a good corporate citizen

– Priority hiring of Inuit and Nunavummiut – Hire summer students – Support local businesses – Organize and participate in community clean ups – Promote Inuit culture and language – Continuous public outreach

Addressing Challenges

Addressing Challenges

• Nunavut organizations and others across

Northern Canada are often challenged to build and maintain required capacity

• The NIRB endeavours to cultivate positive

working relationships

– Understand and respect the mandates and jurisdictions of other organizations – Regular communication – Provide assistance where possible – Develop formal working agreements – Participate in outreach

43 43

Wrap Up

• Nunavut’s regulatory system is uniquely integrated and

inclusive

– Canadian land claims and resulting institutions and processes are a model for other countries – Regularly remind ourselves why we do what we do

• Importance of open communications, supportive

working relationships, public accountability

• Small organizations face unique challenges but are
• ften able to adapt and change more readily than

larger organizations

• Questions?

44 44

Nunavut Impact Review Board (NIRB) P.O. Box 1360 Cambridge Bay, NU Toll Free: 1‐866‐233‐3033 Fax: 1‐867‐983‐2594 www.nirb.ca

Quajannamiik! Quajannamiik! Thank you! Thank you! Merci! Merci!